They really, really don't like Hillary Clinton. So much so that a larger percentage—23 percent—say they intend to vote Third Party than say they intend to vote for Clinton, who had just 20.5 percent support, less than half of Donald Trump's 49 percent. (Despite Trump's near majority, "More than 61 percent indicated they are 'dissatisfied' or 'very dissatisfied' with Trump as the Republican nominee, including 28 percent of those who intend to vote for him.")

Military preference for outre and even libertarian-leaning candidates is no new phenomenon; back in the heart of the 2012 race in late February, Ron Paul was raising twice as much money as President Obama from active military and defense workers, and more than four times as much as the entire rest of the GOP field at the time.

Military Times points out that this survey does not represent "a scientific sampling of the military as a whole," but they do believe it "is representative of the services' more senior and career-oriented members, those who run the military's day-to-day operations and carry out its policies."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

My point was not anything to do with Turks. It was that the euphemism pretends that anything short of an armored division isn’t REALLY committing US lives to combat. We’ve had thousands of troops in the northern Iraq/Syria area for the last 2 years. Acting like there’s some potential vast scaling-up that would completely change the status-quo for the worse is retarded and insulting.

My general impression of the military people I hang around jives with this poll. Support for Clinton among the enlisted ranks is very low, a slight majority favor Trump, and the rest either want a 3rd party or don’t plan on voting.

One of the guys in my barracks wrote an anti-Clinton message on his door’s whiteboard. It says something like “vote Hillary if you don’t care if your buddies die. Vote Sanders if you forgot he already lost. Or do nothing and retreat to your safe space.” Some wuss complained so he added a disclaimer that these are not the views of the Army. The whiner said something along the lines of “Augh! he’s *telling* us who to vote for! That violates UCMJ because I wish it did!” Good grief, if you’re that easily offended, what the hell are you doing in the Army? I really wish everyone would drink a big cup of cement and harden the hell up.

The current message on my white board is: It’s important to release anger in healthy ways. For example, when I hear something I don’t like on the radio, I shake it up and down to punish the little people who live inside.

Johnson hasn’t gotten 15% yet? And in the event he did, the CPD would say it wasn’t a valid poll, etc.

So let me go back to my original plan – Stossel or someone could hold a debate – invite Trump, Hillary, Stein, Johnson and Castle – if Trump and Hillary don’t show up find celebrities who support them and aren’t afraid to explain why.

Hype the heck out of the event. Have the celebrities sit on Denethor-style smaller chairs under the empty chairs meant for Hillary and Trump.

In the case of slaves “sulky and dissatisfied without cause” ? a warning sign of imminent flight ? Cartwright prescribed “whipping the devil out of them” as a “preventative measure”. As a remedy for this “disease,” doctors also made running a physical impossibility by prescribing the removal of both big toes.

american socialist|7.18.16 @ 11:25PM|# “Booring. This speech is made for people who think HRC killed Vincent Foster and those guys in Benghazi. I’m over defacing the Wikipedia page of Michael Flynn. Wanna join me?”

Well, they mighta missed on Foster, but Shrill tossed the diplomat under the truck just as clearly as she destroyed subpoenaed evidence. Slimy commies don’t care about such things, right, slimy commie?

My wife asked me, “What is that strange site you spend time at?” My mind went through it’s Rolodex, trying to figure out which one she meant, but some of those cards were stuck together. Decided it’s better to ask her which site she meant. “The one that hates the government.”

Let’s just say they are rather serious. I’ve spent some time at the temple, but it’s not for me. Generally speaking, I’ll take a person who believes in something that automatically comes into to conflict with collectivism as practiced by the state. I like agitators. .

This dream will come to pass in the future, when rulers grow increasingly corrupt. Ruling according to their own whim and pleasure, they will not make judgments according to what is right. Being greedy, they will grow fat on lucrative bribes. Not showing mercy or compassion to their subjects, they will be fierce and cruel. These rulers will amass wealth by crushing their subjects like stalks of sugar cane in a mill and by taxing them to the last penny.

“Unable to pay the oppressive taxes, the citizens will abandon their villages, towns, and cities, and will flee like refugees to the borders. The heart of the country will be a wilderness, while the remote areas along the borders will teem with people. The country will be just like the pool, muddy in the middle and clear at the edges.”

252 Provide stricken farmers With seeds and sustenance. Eliminate high taxes levied by the previous monarch. Reduce the tax rate on harvests.

253 Protect the poor from the pain of wanting your wealth. Set up no new tolls and reduce those that are heavy. Also free traders from other areas from the afflictions That come from waiting at your door.

Confucius told a similar story of meeting a weeping woman on the side of the road. He asked what was wrong, and she said her husband and then later son had been killed by a tiger. He asked why she did not move away sooner, and she said she stayed because she was afraid of becoming a subject of an even more cruel warlord.

Confucius told his disciples that a tyrant is more fearsome than a man-eating tiger.

OK, a bit more good news. Backstory: The Warriors bought (yes, paid their own money!) for a site in the developing Mission Bay area of SF to build (with their own money!) a stadium. You read that right; their own money. The land had been bought by Sales Force who decided to stay closer to downtown and put it up for sale. A low-ball bid came from UCSF; the Warriors offered asking and got the plot. Under some bogus claim that the entire area should be devoted to bio-research, a group leaned on Benioff (Sales Force CEO) to ‘donate’ the land to UCSF. Benioff pointed out that it wasn’t his land; it belonged to Sales Force’s stock holders, the answer was “No”. The group swore to “tie up the stadium in court until the cows came home”. They really said that.

And the disconnect between the (presumed) profitability of the businesses and the demand for ‘free’ land from Benioff was really hard to swallow. The folks behind the group have been, shall we say, less than visible, and it is certainly their right to be so, but it does raise questions regarding who might have profited from the ‘free’ land. Someone saw it sufficiently valuable to hire some high-priced legal and PR help, until there was a parting of the ways: “Meanwhile, the Mission Bay Alliance’s consulting team is in flux. The group’s PR firm, Singer & Associates, quit this week, a team source confirmed after the news was first reported by the San Francisco Business Times. And it is now working with legal firm Browne George Ross LLP after Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP left the case in April, according to the website.”http://www.csnbayarea.com/warr…..uling-soon Don’t think I’m acquainted with anyone at either firm, but it’s worth poking around…

One of these things is a protected category specifically because idjits would dumb reasoning like this to get them banned.

Also, one of these things is almost certainly not going to be used for some blinkered protest. I can see an asshole heaving a can of pork-and-beans into a crowd. I rather doubt a legal carry gun owner shows up to an event to make a statement and then ends up using the piece on someone.